ASPO Abstracts

Process Evaluation of a Mailed Colorectal Cancer (CRC) Screening DVD Intervention from a Randomized Controlled Trial

Authors: Katz ML, Champion V, Schwartz P, Imperiale T, Fatima H, Paskett E, Perkins S, Tong Y, Gebregziabher N, Krier C, Tharp K, Fields M, Malloy C, Emerson B, and Rawl SM

Category: Early Detection & Risk Prediction
Conference Year: 2020

Abstract Body:
PURPOSE. The purpose of this process evaluation was to assess viewership, engagement, satisfaction, and relevance of a mailed DVD intervention to promote CRC screening. METHODS. In this randomized controlled trial, 190 participants were randomized to one of two intervention groups that were mailed a DVD (DVD only or DVD plus patient navigation) to promote CRC screening. Trained interviewers called participants two weeks after sending the DVD to conduct a brief process evaluation. We made ten call attempts to reach each participant. If a participant reported they did not watch the DVD, we documented the main reason for not watching, reminded them to view it, and arranged for a future call. We assessed whether participants thought the DVD content was helpful, if they learned any new information about CRC screening, and if they would recommend the DVD to others. Participants reported their engagement and satisfaction with the DVD, content relevance, and whether the amount of information provided was appropriate. RESULTS. Participants (n=175; 92%) reported having watched the DVD and completed the brief survey. Main reasons reported for not watching the DVD on the initial call included no time/too busy and DVD issues. Most participants (85%) reported that the cancer screening information was very helpful, about half (47%) learned new information (e.g. polyps can be removed during a colonoscopy), and 99% would recommend the DVD to other people. Participants were engaged (mean=3.3 out of 4) and satisfied (mean=3.4 out of 4) with the DVD content. Most participants (86%) reported that all or most of the information applied to them. Furthermore, most participants (74%) reported that the DVD provided just the right amount of information (too much information: 24%; not enough information: 2%). CONCLUSIONS. This analysis demonstrated the importance of conducting process evaluation after mailing intervention materials. Participants reported being engaged and satisfied with the DVD content, and they perceived the content to be relevant. Information regarding the reach, suitability, and acceptability of the mailed intervention material is critical when explaining the effects of the intervention and planning intervention dissemination in the future.

Keywords: Colorectal cancer; Screening